However a couple of weeks ago I handled an M&P 2.0 in a shop and I liked it compared to my older M&P.

It had a decent trigger, it was really "grippy" and the thumb safety (which for me is a must on a pistol with a short non DA pull).

So yesterday while out with a good friend and also retired deputy we dropped into my favorite gun shop and they had a brand new .45 M&P with a safety to $425 out the door so it followed me home.

I got home and did 10 trigger pulls on the Lyman digital gauge and the trigger averaged 3 lbs 15 ounces!

I'll shoot it today to make sure it shoots where it looks and it functions.

I doubt I'll ever carry it as the other one I had is just too fat as is this one but it will make a nice house gun or one to show and tell in classes.

I handled the new Beretta Glock knockoff - except for those huge "fins" on the slide it seems like a nifty gun and it felt well and also had a decent trigger. They had frame kits there for $49 but the one I handled was just fine.

I also found a Sig 320 with a safety. Alas it was a 9mm and a compact so I would have had to spend more than the $550 it cost to get it in a longer slide and frame and bigger caliber but it did feel good and also has a nice trigger.

Just ramblin'

Jim H.

25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)

pochis

Posted - September 14 2017 : 09:18:07 AM still curious as to how Jim liked the m&p 2.0 45

Dr. Courtney

Posted - June 27 2017 : 1:12:31 PM

quote:Originally posted by Jim Higginbotham

All one has to do to compare is take a regular wooden pencil with an eraser and put it down the barrel *do make sure it is clear!*, point the gun skyward and press the trigger.

The difference between most SA hammer guns and almost all striker fired guns is phenomenal.

DA autos and revolvers are sort of in between.

The real sticking point though is that nearly all striker fired guns do not have much in the way of firing pin travel and if you get a bunch of ammo that has a healthy crimp or short case length that extra few thousandths of an inch is enough to prevent the round from firing.

Add to that some are sensitive to lube migrating into the striker channel - a hammer gun does not really care where you put the lube.

There is a reason JMB got away from striker guns (he did try on the French contract for the 9mm but he ditched that one in favor of the hammer).

No question the striker fired guns work most of the time - but they are more dependent on perfect ammo. I found that even revolvers are more dependent on primer seating depth than hammer type autos when I finally got one in .45 ACP. I had to load revolver ammo much more carefully.

Just Ramblin'

Jim H.

Great ramble, Jim. That pencil test (or a minor variation) will come in handy as we are planning some performance testing of lead free primers. It will be very useful to quantify firing pin (or striker) energy. Thanks!

Chris Christian

Posted - June 27 2017 : 12:10:19 PM

quote:Originally posted by LittleBill

I've got one: it's marked 'Genuine Grock, Made in China'. Guy at the gunshow assured me it was the real thing....

gw

Posted - June 27 2017 : 10:36:55 AM

quote:Originally posted by Barnacle Bill

quote:Originally posted by gw

once we start importing Glocks made in China we'll have it made......

I don't think the political stars are ever going to be in alignment on that one. No Democrat president is going to drop the Clinton ban on importing guns from China. Our current President, arguably the most pro-gun since TR, isn't going to make it easier to import anything from China.

I think with the art of the deal, if China has something Mr Trump needs anything is possible.....

I don't think the political stars are ever going to be in alignment on that one. No Democrat president is going to drop the Clinton ban on importing guns from China. Our current President, arguably the most pro-gun since TR, isn't going to make it easier to import anything from China.

gw

Posted - June 26 2017 : 3:45:10 PM I certainly see Bink's (AKA Jim H.) point on early Colts

early 20th century Colt 1911s and the transitional A1s made in the prewar years before they went to military finish are as nice as any handmade 1911 you'll get today.

they had a lot of hand work done, in fact they were mostly handfit. but when production picked up during WWII specs, tolerances, and finish were opened up to not only increase production but decrease cost.

those GI guns rattled and shook, armorers and GIs disassembled those old guns, dumped the parts in solvent, and reassembled guns from the mix. hand fitting went out the window.

guns are tools, modern metalurgy and manufacturing techniques produce rugged goods at a cheap price.

once we start importing Glocks made in China we'll have it made......

Ten Driver

Posted - June 26 2017 : 2:51:14 PM Yes, absolutely. In fact, my duty gun has both a hammer and a polymer frame, so I'm very aware of it.

The quoted comment was in reference to the comparison that Jim made between his M&P and his 1911, that's all.

V/RMike

Barnacle Bill

Posted - June 26 2017 : 10:35:51 AM

quote:Originally posted by Ten Driver

I think the weight issue is important for most folks too. Again, we might make accomodations to keep using a favored system, but most people will not carry a gun that weighs 7 ounces more but has half the cartridge capacity.

Let's not conflate having a polymer frame and having a striker-fired mechanism. These are independent design decisions. I have still-in-production polymer-framed service-caliber pistols from three manufacturers - SIG, HK & Beretta. In fact, the source of my original comment about not getting the striker-fired thing is that all three manufacturers on that list have introduced striker-fired models when their previous offerings were fine best as I can tell.

Bink

Posted - June 22 2017 : 10:14:05 AM

quote:[i]Originally posted by gw[/i][br]

quote:[i]Originally posted by Ten Driver[/i][br]Bill, if my recent experience with the new Model 66 is any guide map, I'd much rather have the old gun than the new. It's nice that S&W fixed the issue with the forcing cone, but the quality of the build is disappointing compared to the old.

And, there's the darned lock.

the Bangor-Punta era guns weren't all that

around that time end item inspection was cut by S&W and machine inspection wasn't as good as today.

not just guns are impacted by quailty cuts.

electronics, cars, and even airplane parts (which is pretty scarey)

I certainly don't disagree. Bangor Punta took over S&W about the time or a little bit after I started gunsmithing as a sideline - their service time for any significant problem was close to a year! And they had significant problems!

Still, guns are individuals and it might matter whether your gun was made on Monday or Friday (both sometimes inferior to guns made on Wednesday).

Still, no one has come up with guns that will pass the inspection that a 1911a1 went through in WW-I.

I do think there are now guns that will pass the L.E.A.A. tests of the mid 1970s - only two guns passed that test (since passing required two guns of the same model to pass): The S&W Model 10 and the Colt Series 70 Government Model. I do think a Glock would pass today if they use Glocks specs for tolerances. Several others would also.

I do not believe myself handguns have actually improved (as to reliability or practical use) but there are a bunch more that are good than there were back then.

What they are is much cheaper to make and it is sort of remarkable that many of them actually work.

Jim

LittleBill

Posted - June 22 2017 : 07:01:42 AM Mike, I hear you.

I'm tempted to say that money should be no object when we're arming those who daily go in harm's way to keep us safe--- especially when money is spent for so many less-worthy causes--- but I realize that's not how it works. .

I understand what you mean about the price issue, but we're only buying single examples for personal use. If you had to outfit an agency, you couldn't ignore the price tag, and there's a huge difference between a standard model, hammer-fired, Sig P229 and a striker-fired Glock/M&P. The striker-fired guns are easier and cheaper to produce, and that's been a huge factor in their success.

Mike

LittleBill

Posted - June 21 2017 : 06:53:51 AM Makes sense.... my two NDs both happened with my brother's H&K P7, which had a different mechanism from what I was used to..

castricone

Posted - June 21 2017 : 03:56:12 AM

quote:[i]Originally posted by Dennis Martin[/i]

Speaking of accidents... it's my understanding that the popularity of Glocks was accompanied by a significant increase in the number of negligent discharges. Which is easy to understand: no safety, relatively light short trigger, no hammer to alert you that the trigger is being pulled.

For me, my Grayguns-tuned P-series DA/SA Sigs are the ideal handguns: fit my hand, smooth light double-action trigger, the ability to cock the gun to single-action if time allows, and a short light single-action pull with a crisp break, and [i]very[/i] short reset.

Thumb on the hammer when I'm reholstering alerts me if I've failed to decock it, and makes NDs a lot less likely since I can feel the hammer rising if something is pulling the trigger.

Familiarity is also no doubt a factor.

Well my friend, Dennis-Bill (ha!), what's old is new again.

The same trend you described accompanied the introduction of DA/SA handguns into LE use as well. Those who were around can tell you lots of stories about NDs that happened with the light SA pulls, or with failures to decock before holstering. I wrote about this in the (sadly) now-defunct Police Marksman Magazine before it closed down the second time.

Every time we change the weapons, we see the same problems. There's a clue in there somewhere, if we pay attention to it.

Mike

LittleBill

Posted - June 20 2017 : 9:24:09 PM And as far as weight: works against you when you're carrying it, but works for you when you're shooting it.... which, after all, is what you're carrying it for.... shooting it when your life depends on it: when every little bit helps.....

LittleBill

Posted - June 20 2017 : 8:59:12 PM

quote:Originally posted by Ten Driver

Hello.

I think the principal advantages to striker-fired over hammer fired are the lower bore axis and simplicity in manual of arms. While many of us are highly-trained and experienced enthusiasts that can make accommodations for our favorite hammer-fired guns, these striker advantages should not be overlooked for the general population. It's why these guns have eclipsed hammer-fired guns in most markets.

An additional plus is that they're cheaper and easier to manufacture. Price matters to most folks, and it's especially important on an agency or DoD scale.

I think the weight issue is important for most folks too. Again, we might make accomodations to keep using a favored system, but most people will not carry a gun that weighs 7 ounces more but has half the cartridge capacity.

There's no doubt that hammer fired guns have strengths that the striker guns don't, but the market has spoken and it clearly favors the striker designs, on balance. That didn't happen by accident.

Mike

As far as price, I get it... to a point.

I'm not a fancy guy: I don't wear high-priced clothes, the car I drive is ten years old, I don't dine at fancy restaurants. When I'm traveling, I stay in the cheapest motel I can find. I'm always hot to save a buck. When I'm shopping for something, I hold out for a bargain.

But when we're talking about my EDC handgun--- 'safety equipment' which, if I do need it, as a legally-armed civilian, I'm gonna be needing it to save my life--- since I can't legally use it unless my life is on the line--- cost is not a consideration.

In that situation, like nowhere else in my life, 'money is no object': the gun I'm carrying is gonna be the one that performs the best in my hands. Regardless of whether I could be carrying one 'almost as good' for half the price. .

LittleBill

Posted - June 20 2017 : 8:40:12 PM

quote:Originally posted by Ten Driver

Bill, if my recent experience with the new Model 66 is any guide map, I'd much rather have the old gun than the new. It's nice that S&W fixed the issue with the forcing cone, but the quality of the build is disappointing compared to the old.

And, there's the darned lock.

Yep. "Pinned and recessed" may not be better in themselves, but it lets you know the guns were built back when the quality was paramount. The trigger pulls on my 29-2 and 19-4 are wonderfully smooth and light, compared to today's production..

LittleBill

Posted - June 20 2017 : 8:34:08 PMDon't know what happened, but I wrote the last post.... yet it posted under the name 'Dennis Martin'!

I guess I've been hacked....

Little Bill

You don't suppose.... the Russians did it....?

Dennis Martin

Posted - June 20 2017 : 8:27:54 PM

quote:[i]Originally posted by Ten Driver[/i][br]Hello.

I think the principal advantages to striker-fired over hammer fired are the lower bore axis and simplicity in manual of arms. While many of us are highly-trained and experienced enthusiasts that can make accommodations for our favorite hammer-fired guns, these striker advantages should not be overlooked for the general population. It's why these guns have eclipsed hammer-fired guns in most markets.

An additional plus is that they're cheaper and easier to manufacture. Price matters to most folks, and it's especially important on an agency or DoD scale.

I think the weight issue is important for most folks too. Again, we might make accomodations to keep using a favored system, but most people will not carry a gun that weighs 7 ounces more but has half the cartridge capacity.

There's no doubt that hammer fired guns have strengths that the striker guns don't, but the market has spoken and it clearly favors the striker designs, on balance. That didn't happen by accident.

Mike

Speaking of accidents... it's my understanding that the popularity of Glocks was accompanied by a significant increase in the number of negligent discharges. Which is easy to understand: no safety, relatively light short trigger, no hammer to alert you that the trigger is being pulled.

For me, my Grayguns-tuned P-series DA/SA Sigs are the ideal handguns: fit my hand, smooth light double-action trigger, the ability to cock the gun to single-action if time allows, and a short light single-action pull with a crisp break, and [i]very[/i] short reset.

Thumb on the hammer when I'm reholstering alerts me if I've failed to decock it, and makes NDs a lot less likely since I can feel the hammer rising if something is pulling the trigger.

Familiarity is also no doubt a factor.

Dennis Martin

Posted - June 20 2017 : 7:17:57 PM Back in 1967 or so, I bought a SA revolver with a frame mounted firing pin. Once upon a time, the spring that retracts the firing pin messed up and the cylinder was locked. Getting the thing apart was fun, but it hasn't done it again. Dunno if that's a possible situation with current designs.

gw

Posted - June 20 2017 : 3:51:53 PM

quote:Originally posted by Ten Driver

Bill, if my recent experience with the new Model 66 is any guide map, I'd much rather have the old gun than the new. It's nice that S&W fixed the issue with the forcing cone, but the quality of the build is disappointing compared to the old.

And, there's the darned lock.

the Bangor-Punta era guns weren't all that

around that time end item inspection was cut by S&W and machine inspection wasn't as good as today.

not just guns are impacted by quailty cuts.

electronics, cars, and even airplane parts (which is pretty scarey)

Ten Driver

Posted - June 20 2017 : 12:47:34 PM Bill, if my recent experience with the new Model 66 is any guide map, I'd much rather have the old gun than the new. It's nice that S&W fixed the issue with the forcing cone, but the quality of the build is disappointing compared to the old.

And, there's the darned lock.

Ten Driver

Posted - June 20 2017 : 12:44:54 PM Hello.

I think the principal advantages to striker-fired over hammer fired are the lower bore axis and simplicity in manual of arms. While many of us are highly-trained and experienced enthusiasts that can make accommodations for our favorite hammer-fired guns, these striker advantages should not be overlooked for the general population. It's why these guns have eclipsed hammer-fired guns in most markets.

An additional plus is that they're cheaper and easier to manufacture. Price matters to most folks, and it's especially important on an agency or DoD scale.

I think the weight issue is important for most folks too. Again, we might make accomodations to keep using a favored system, but most people will not carry a gun that weighs 7 ounces more but has half the cartridge capacity.

There's no doubt that hammer fired guns have strengths that the striker guns don't, but the market has spoken and it clearly favors the striker designs, on balance. That didn't happen by accident.

Mike

revjen45

Posted - June 16 2017 : 12:15:55 PM 1) I tried carrying a full size Cz75 but it hurt my back too bad.2) I find that the Makarov with 3 reload mags works as my home and curtillage EDC piece. Yeah, I know it's a mousegun but better a mousegun on my person than the Spaceman Spiff Galactic Blaster I can't realistically carry due to pain/comfort issues.*3) I was a gunsmith at a S&W warranty service shop back in the Early Paleolithic, and I loved the build quality on the old guns. For some reason I can't get worked up to buy a new one.

* Please note that I don't engage in the high speed low drag lifestyle. Haven't had an armed encounter all week. The Mak is to get me to something better than a handgun anyway.

Jim Higginbotham

Posted - June 16 2017 : 11:13:12 AM

quote:Originally posted by Evan

I remember when the Smith rep tried to sell us police trade-ins, S&W Model 65's with 3" barrel and round butt. should've bought all 20 and kept them for myself!

If only we had a time machine. Then again maybe not, I'd be tempted to stay.